Skip to main content

Denzinger timeline of communion for adulterers in Church history and current pontificate - Rorate Caeli

+
JMJ

I believe that context is critical to understanding what may be the apex of the post-conciliar crisis.

The timeline provided by Andrew Guernsey provides the context in all its damning glory.

I will be breaking the post down into a series of posts to make it easier to access!

P^3

Source: Rorate-Caeli





Denzinger timeline of communion for adulterers in Church history and current pontificate


Nathan rebukes King David for his Adultery (Eugène Siberdt)

For the benefit of our readers, Mr. Andrew Guernsey has graciously shared with us his Denzinger-style research identifying the sources of Church teaching and perennial discipline, and exhaustively cataloguing the Bergoglian machinations, to allow communion for divorced and civilly “remarried” adulterers. In a nutshell, this is nearly every known utterance of the topic from the dawn of man, until our current, pathetic state of affairs.

The document starts with the Old Testament, then the New Testament, and then continues chronologically through the Fathers, popes, martyrs, councils and more upon which the Church bases its unchanging doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage and Her perennial mandate of excluding adulterers from Holy Communion and the Sacrament of Penance, except that they live in complete continence as brother and sister.

Subsequent to Church history, the document also catalogues the timeline of source interviews, homilies and other mischief surrounding the pontificate of Pope Francis.

The contrast pre- and post-Francis on this matter is nothing short of incredible, read in the context of Church history, as this well-researched document proves.

Now, the burden of proof is clearly on those agitating for change -- for rupture. Let them prove how they advocate for this change while remaining God-fearing Catholics. 

 Rorate






Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Regarding Post: Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer no longer ... now Bishop Joseph Pfeiffer (Can't see this being a problem...)

 + JMJ   I've been watching the popularity of the post about Fr. Pfeiffer's attempted episcopal consecration and its continued top listing on the 'popular posts' list at the bottom of posts.  After some thought, I decided that I don't want to be responsible for anyone joining Fr. Pfeiffer's 'group', however unlikely that would be at this time. So I have reverted the article to the draft state. If anyone wants it reinstated, I would ask that they comment on this post with a rationale for reinstatement. P^3

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3

What the heck is a congregation of "Pontifical Right"

+ JMJ In a discussion with a friend the question occurred to me that I didn't actually know was is involved in being a religious order of 'pontifical right'. I had a vague notion that this meant they reported to Rome as opposed to the local diocese. I'm also aware that, according to the accounts I have heard, the Archbishop received 'praise' and the written direction to incardinate priests directly into the SSPX.  This is interesting because it implies that the SSPX priests were no longer required to incardinate in the local diocese but in the SSPX. This is something that belongs to an order of 'pontifical right'. Anyway here's some definitions: Di diritto pontificio is the Italian term for “of pontifical right” . It is given to the ecclesiastical institutions (the religious and secular institutes, societies of apostolic life) either created by the Holy See or approved by it with the formal decree, known by its Latin name, Decretu

Is it sinful to attend the Novus Ordo (New Mass) - Is it Sinful to Not Attend the Novus Ordo on Sunday?

+ JMJ A non-SSPX Catholic is upset over the SSPX statements on not attending the Novus Ordo Missae. Ladies and gentlemen, what the SSPX, or at least its website editor, is advocating is a mortal sin against the Third Commandment.  Unless the priest deviates from the language of the Sacramentary, the consecration, and thus the rest of Mass is to be considered valid.  No one may elect not to attend Mass simply because abuses are occurring therein.  Might I suggest that such absenteeism is its own abuse?  The Third Commandment binds under mortal sin.  Father So-And-So from the SSPX has no authority whatsoever to excuse attendance at Mass, be that Mass ever so unpalatable. Source:Restore DC Catholicism Well, this is interesting. First why does the SSPX issue this statement? Because it is sinful to put your faith in danger by attending a protestant service.  It is likewise dangerous to put your faith in danger by attending a protestantized mass (ie the Novus Ordo Missae